Barack Lobster - Down, Down … goes his credibility

It was a joy to read this article from the UK Telegraph this morning. It illustrates just how low Barack Obama has sunk with the latest in a long string of bumblings and fumblings. His popularity continues to tank after a brief flirtation with recovery following his successful implementation of healthcare rationing.

In the piece, the Telegraph’s Toby Harnden calls out Obama for his inept behavior at last week’s “press conference”.

Central to Obama’s appeal was his promise to be truly different. His failure to achieve that is now at the core of the deep disappointment Americans feel about him. At the press conference - the first full-scale affair he had deigned to give for 309 days - he appeared uncomfortable and petulant.

His approach to the issue was that of the law student suddenly fascinated by a science project. He displayed none of the visceral indignation Americans feel about pretty much everything these days - two-thirds now say they are “angry” about the way things are going - resorting instead to Spock-like technocratic language and legalese. “I’m not contradicting my prior point,” he stated at one juncture. During those 63 minutes of soporific verbosity, about 800 barrels of oil poured into the Gulf.

“soporific verbosity” and “Spock-like technocratic language and legalese” Don’t you love the way the English can turn a phrase?

Harnden then points out the 4,233,857th attempt by Obama to evade responsibility by blaming George W. Bush for his problems.

Obama engaged in the obligatory populist bashing of Big Oil and, of course, demonstrated the Obama administration’s version of Tourette’s Syndrome, blaming the previous administration for the situation when, by my reckoning, it’s a full 16 months since Bush left office.

“Obama administration’s version of Tourette’s” - I’m using that. Repeatedly.

He then proceeds to slam Obama’s photo op on the beach, where the POTUS is seen poking his finger into the sand (as opposed to his head, which is normally located there).

By Friday, he was sticking his finger in the sand at Grand Isle, Louisiana as part of a photo op self-consciously designed to contrast with Bush’s famous looking down on the Katrina devastation from Air Force One. It was Obama’s second visit to Louisiana in the 39 days since disaster struck. According to C’BS’s Mark Knoller, in the same period Bush visited the post-Katrina region seven times.

When I saw that picture (it’s shown in Harnden’s story), I simply wondered what kind of mundane, mindless dreck he was scribbling - perhaps “help me?”

Finally, the article turns serious in pointing to Obama’s utter failure to deliver on a key campaign promise of “a new era of transparency”

But perhaps the most dangerous sign during the press conference for Democrats fearful of an unprecedented electoral disaster in November’s mid-term elections was the evasion and opacity of the man who promised a new era of transparency and a different kind of politics.

When asked about the resignation of the director of the Minerals Management Service - an agency he had excoriated - he professed that “I don’t know the circumstances in which this occurred”. She had, of course, been fired.

Even worse was Obama’s refusal to say anything about the growing furore over White House attempts to persuade Congressman Joe Sestak to pull out of the Democratic Senate primary contest in Pennsylvania. Obama’s advisers had preferred the Republican turncoat Senator Arlen Specter - and Sestak inconveniently let slip that he’d been offered a government job to step aside.

That was potentially illegal and for weeks the White House stonewalled. When, even more inconveniently, Sestak beat Specter, the trust-us-nothing-untoward-happened approach would no longer wash. But still Obama declined to answer the question on Thursday, fobbing the reporter – and America – off with the promise that “there will be an official response shortly on the Sestak issue”.

Yet again, the Obamites have employed evasion, lies and misdirection to attempt to avoid blame for their missteps and misbehavior. The American media seems to be OK with simply accepting this lack of transparency, but journalists such as Harnden, who are not threatened by the strong-arm tactics of Rahm Emanuel and the rest of the Chicago politithugs, are free to speak the truth.

It’s a shame that Americans do not often see the flavor of analysis that Harnden presents in this piece. Instead we receive pre-chewed pablum served up by the sycophants of the New York Times and Washington Post. However, there is light at the end of the tunnel. When the WaPo publishes a story like the one that streiff covered this week, titled “Obama struggling to show he’s in control of oil spill”, there is hope that the media lapdogs have climbed down from Obama’s lap and are now nipping at his heels. Let’s hope they start chewing on his leg.

UPDATE: Holy lapdog, Batman: Maureen Dowd gets on the “Obama Is Spock” bandwagon with an almost-un-sycophantic article that I missed yesterday. She states:

Too often it feels as though Barry is watching from a balcony, reluctant to enter the fray until the clamor of the crowd forces him to come down. The pattern is perverse. The man whose presidency is rooted in his ability to inspire withholds that inspiration when it is most needed.

“Perverse”. Well, that applies to a lot of things that go on in the WH these days and could be used to describe his entire presidency. But the end of her piece is really the money shot:

Obama and top aides who believe in his divinity make a mistake to dismiss complaints of his aloofness as Washington white noise. He treats the press as a nuisance rather than examining his own inability to encapsulate Americans’ feelings.

“The media may get tired of the story, but we will not,” he told Gulf Coast residents when he visited on Friday. Actually, if it weren’t for the media, the president would probably never have woken up from his torpor and flown down there.

Instead of getting Bill Clinton to offer Joe Sestak a job, Obama should be offering Clinton one. Bill would certainly know how to gush at a gusher gone haywire. Let him resume a cameo role as Feeler in Chief. The post is open.

BWAHAHAHA. I could learn to like this Good Maureen. But I doubt it’ll last.

Letter to Editor – Phil Stoller – 27 May 2010

I am proud to call Wells County my home. I have always felt that my upbringing has given me a set of principles and values that I share with my neighbors. We in Wells County are “doers” not “talkers,” and we are "givers" not "takers." There is a quiet sense of pride and decency in all of this.

We look at Washington D.C. with frustration, disappointment, and perhaps apprehension as we watch our government stray so far from what it was created to be. All the while, we take some degree of comfort that at least here, we are keeping our priorities straight. But are we?

The minimum expectation of local government is that it do its required job: protection of public safety, maintenance of infrastructure, and responsible administration of the public's trust. In the case of Township Governments, they are to provide fire protection and poor relief . We expect our elected officials to do this job with diligence, competence, and integrity. Recent headlines splashed with stories of corruption, incompetence and misplaced priorities have begun to undermine this trust.

Jefferson Township has been one of these D.C.-like violators of our trust. We expect our Townships to protect our property, family, and homes from fire. This is a requirement, not an option. The Jefferson trustee continues to short-change obligatory funds from fire protection, paying far below its fair share (approximately 18% of the operational budget). The Trustee has withheld these vital funds all the while paying himself nearly three times that of other Wells County trustees. In addition he has paid his wife three times the amount of other Deputy Trustees in the County, and we the taxpayers are “renting” a portion of his home. One can forgive the just rewards of a hard working man, but to do all this for himself while siphoning away potential fire protection dollars is inexcusable. His personal financial gain is not worth the potential lives of a mother, father, child, or volunteer fire fighter saved by adequate funding.

When approached with potentially equitable solutions, this same trustee refused to even discuss the proposal. The volunteer fire fighters who are regularly shocked out of sleep to come to our aid, are rightly at their wits end. Their funding has been squandered, and their ability to protect the lives of their neighbors is under attack.

This is Wells County. We are “doers,” hard-working people who drop what they are doing to bag sand when the river is flooding even though our own homes remain safe. We are "givers," people who put out signs asking for prayer even though our own children are not at risk. This is in who we are, what we were brought up to believe, and what we aspire to protect. If local government doesn’t reflect who we are than it is time to say enough! We must expect Jefferson's trustee to do what is required of him by law. We must tell all our elected officials, that we won’t tolerate Washington-like priorities that place personal well-being above the good of our community.

Phillip Stoller

Urge Mitch Daniels to Appoint a Constitutional Justice

For immediate release Contact Bryan J. Brown (260) 515-8511 FORT WAYNE, INDIANA

The ArchAngel Institute (Indiana nonprofit corporation dedicated to building the Culture of Life upon the ruins of the culture of death) is today urging Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels to take decisive action to free all Hoosier attorneys and the Hoosier justice system from the oppression documented by the internationally-recognized attorney Alan Dershowitz.

The Harvard School of Law professor has documented his troubling experience with Hoosier "justice" in a tell-all column entitled  "A Speech Code for Lawyers”: http://www.alandershowitz.com/publications/docs/lawyerspeechcode.html 

In that expose' the leftist Dershowitz notes that:

I have argued cases all over the world, and I have never encountered a legal system as result-oriented as that of Indiana or a chief justice as self-protective as Chief Justice Randall Shepard.” Judge Randall Shepard has enjoyed unquestioned control over the Indiana judiciary since the mid-80's and has used that authority to shape the contours of the attorney's disciplinary authority, attorney licensing and even the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program.

The ArchAngel Institute has documented the troubling use of political correctness as a foil against a conservative attorney through these captive systems and warned that plans have been located to take these machinations even further. ArchAngel Institute Executive Director Bryan J. Brown, a licensed Kansas attorney since 1996 who has been cleared as to character and fitness by Kansas, Montana, Missouri, the National Conference of Bar Examiners and the United States Supreme Court was recently denied entrance into Indiana's court system in an order signed by Chief Judge Randall Shepard.

This miscarriage of justice is documented in the posts gathered under Brown v. Indiana and Brown v. Bowman at www.archangelinstitute.org. That order and the process that concluded in that order reveal a startling lack of concern for due process and constitutional governance on Indiana's High Court.

Posts at www.archangelinstitute.org document a seemingly unconstitutional use of religion and politics in the processing of a Hoosier bar applicant. See:

http://www.archangelinstitute.org/a-post-modern-heresy-trial-post-2-what-my-inquisitors-most-wanted-to-hear/

Brown has sued the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program and its hand-picked "cooperating clinicians" (the Indiana judiciary's Orwellian term) for the allegedly unconstitutional abuses that Brown documented. Those pleadings are available at this link:

 http://www.scribd.com/doc/23961843/Brown-v-Bowman-complaint-12-09

According to Brown,

Governor Daniels can free Indiana from it current oppression by seizing the opportunity presented by the recently announced retirement of Justice Theodore Boehm.

As is explained in more detail at

http://www.archangelinstitute.org/governor-mitch-daniels-can-set-indiana-free-from-its-bully-court/ ,

Governor Daniels can find both a new Indiana Supreme Court Justice and new Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice in one appointment, placing a constitution-respecting jurist on the High Court who is dedicated to reforming a system that Alan Dershowitz accuses of being less just than a third-rate banana republic.

The ArchAngel Institute urges all persons of good will to join them in calling for this change of the guard in Indiana's legal system. The Institute will continue to develop this call for reformation at www.archangelinstitute.org in the weeks to come.

 

See this post for the public interest nexus driving this call for reform. --

Bryan J. Brown, Esq.

Licensed in Kansas Bar No. 17634 (260) 515-8511

Judiciary Committee Republicans: Do your job, Holder.

Done with the White House non-response to the claims that Joe Sestak (who recently beat out Obama-endorsed Specter in the Pennsylvania Senate primary), all seven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have stepped up to demand a proper investigation from AG Holder.

Via Jake Tapper:

“If such things happened they would constitute a serious breach of the law,” Axelrod told CNN, “and when the allegations were looked into there is no evidence of such a thing”

That was not enough for the Republican Senators, who wrote to Holder that they “do not believe the Department of Justice can properly defer to White House lawyers to investigate a matter that could involve ‘a serious breach of the law.’ The White House cannot possibly manage an internal investigation of potential criminal misconduct while simultaneously crafting a public narrative to rebut the claim that misconduct occurred.”

Wait - the White House shouldn’t be left to handle an investigation into a claim that could land them with a felony? These people are just asking for too much!

The ramifications of this are huge, and the claim should be treated accordingly. It’s inconvenient any way the Democrats handle it, at this point - I can’t figure out how they can spin it to their benefit. From our own Haystack earlier today:

This is all rather counterintuitive to me as I don’t follow Democrat politics. Maybe the Administration is dragging this story out in an effort to give Sestak anti-Administration cred as he goes into an election. Maybe they’re just inept. Whatever the reason, the Obama Administration is now in the interesting position of potentially supporting a candidate they have branded as either a liar or delusional.

It’s unbelievable that it had to come to this - the White House arrogance behind pretending this didn’t happen is stunning.

Meghan McCain and the Irony of the Pot Calling Kettle Black

I suppose the phrase “the pot calling the kettle black” is somehow racist now, but since I’m called one incessantly just for being a Conservative anyway, I’ll say it regardless. Meghan McCain epitomizes that phrase and she proves it yet again with her latest inane rambling of her alleged thoughts on Rand Paul.

I admit that when she tweeted that a new article at The Daily Beast, on Rand Paul no less, was forthcoming, I giggled with schadenfreude-y anticipation. I knew it would be snicker-worthy and I wasn’t disappointed. The only problem is that when I read her reputed writing, I hear things like “ZOMG! Why all the H8rs!!111 Oh, look! Cute shoes!” But, once I tell that voice to get off my lawn (as I’d like to do to Meghan herself), I’m able to somehow muddle through, as a service to y’all. See? The things I do, like read Meghan McCain, so you don’t have to! You’re welcome.

Meghan McCain, of course, jumped right on the bandwagon of her Progressive posse to further the “Tea Partiers are racist” meme. She first set it up by implying that somehow Rand Paul is the face of the Tea Party movement, proving once again that she, like her Progressive buddies, knows nothing about the Tea Parties, nor do they even understand them. It has no face. It has no leader. Nor does it want one. Then, she goes in for the Racist ™ topper:

Paul’s nomination could have been a moment of triumph for the Tea Party movement, as well as for Republicans, but instead it was an embarrassment. And I felt the disappointment firsthand, given that I agree with and support numerous things the Tea Party represents. Like many Americans, I’m angered by the intense spending going on under the Obama administration. But when the movement was given the opportunity to present specific solutions and answer real questions, its leaders nominated someone who—yet again—revealed weird, racist undertones, no matter how he wants to spin it.

An embarrassment for Republicans? Oh my, my tummy hurts! That right there is the pot calling the kettle black. Also note, she doesn’t list anything that the Tea Party represents. Because she’s clueless, as always. Furthermore, in addition to the unfounded claim that somehow Paul’s answer, which only had to do with specific arguments of potential over-reach of the federal government, had “weird, racist undertones”, she also adds in “yet again”. Yet again? Nice job promulgating the idea that the Tea Parties are racist, Meggie Mac. That should get her invited to some super cool cocktail parties, which are the only kind of parties she seems to know or care about.

As always, Meghan McCain is concerned only with Meghan McCain. And being thought of as “cool” and “hip” and “edgy” so that the right people, in her mind, will like her. She has yet to learn that they only pretend to like her as long as they can use her to bash Republicans. She obviously doesn’t realize yet that is the only reason she is paid – such a depressing thought – for her alleged writing.

She also has yet to learn that the “I’m so brave, I speak my own mind” line doesn’t work when one always takes the easy route and never, ever says anything actually brave. You see, Meghan, you can’t claim to be an individual nor a rebel. You have proven yourself to be a sheep — in cute shoes, yes, but a sheep nonetheless.

She constantly calls for a big tent, calls people ‘haters’ (or H8rs for those of limited intelligence on the Left) and claims she is being silenced. She takes photographs for an ad campaign with duct tape over her mouth, as if anyone is stopping her from speaking. Sadly, oh-so-sadly, they are not. Yet, in the next breath, she seeks to silence the thoughts and opinions of anyone with whom she disagrees. They are meany pants, you see. And not “cool” and stuff. They’ve probably never been on The View, for goodness sake!

The rest of the article is good for a few more snickers, but the conclusion of her thoughtful insight (I can’t keep a straight face whilst typing that) really stands out:

Paul’s role within the Republican Party (if any) has yet to be determined. But one thing I am sure of is that, until we start nominating candidates who have more realistic views of the complex world we live in and stop seeing things strictly in black and white (no pun intended), we are going to continue losing elections and becoming punch lines for late-night talk-show hosts.

Meghan, honey, your buddies are the ones who only see things in black and white. Literally. As for the punch line remark, I suggest you look in the mirror. There, you will see what happens when one refuses to hang their head down in shame and slowly walk away when their 15 minutes of fame are up.

—–

(cross-posted from NewsReal)

The Joe Sestak thing is kind of a big deal, actually.

I have to disagree with Jim Geraghty here that Rep. Joe Sestak’s (D) admitting that the White House tried to bribe him reflects well on Sestak. Either Sestak is lying about this, in which case he’s, well, a liar who did so for crass political gain; or Sestak’s telling the truth about this, in which case he’s pretty much explicitly participating in a cover-up of a felony. Either way, talking in general terms is not really acceptable. Unless there was an active conspiracy permeating the entire Executive Branch to bribe Joe Sestak, somebody in the White House is innocent of this crime - but until we get the full details of what happens, we won’t know who. And while I may have been heavily critical of the unprofessional behavior of the White House’s staffers, I think it’s hardly fair of Sestak to talk about this scandal in a fashion that implicates all of them.

Put another way: check out this video from the GOP House Oversight committee…

…By now ignorance is not a legitimate excuse regarding this issue - Gibbs’ and Sestak’s squirming to the contrary - and the regular media isn’t any happier about being given the mushroom treatment than Rep. Issa is.

Moe Lane

PS: To answer Jonah: the scandal is that we were told by President Obama that President Obama was better than this. As I noted earlier, I guess that was a lie.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

500 SEIU bully-boys vs. 1 14-year-old.

Nina Easton* got to meet the faux-populists of SEIU up close and personal:

Last Sunday, on a peaceful, sun-crisp afternoon, our toddler finally napping upstairs, my front yard exploded with 500 screaming, placard-waving strangers on a mission to intimidate my neighbor, Greg Baer. Baer is deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), a senior executive based in Washington, D.C. And that — in the minds of the organizers at the politically influential Service Employees International Union and a Chicago outfit called National Political Action — makes his family fair game.

Waving signs denouncing bank “greed,” hordes of invaders poured out of 14 school buses, up Baer’s steps, and onto his front porch. As bullhorns rattled with stories of debtor calls and foreclosed homes, Baer’s teenage son Jack — alone in the house — locked himself in the bathroom. “When are they going to leave?” Jack pleaded when I called to check on him.

Just a couple other things to note: the normally media-loving SEIU didn’t bring the media, the SEIU’s trying to unionize BoA, SEIU owes BoA several million dollars, and the intended victim is himself a Democrat. AND HOW’S THAT WORKING OUT FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, GREG? Anyway, read Big Journalism for more unsavory details - but guess what, taxpayers! Your tax money was spent on police support for union intimidation of a child! Doesn’t that make you all warm and fuzzy inside? - and check out Hot Air to see the video of the liberal defending the SEIU while pretending not to.

You know, I’d ask what DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen (whose district this is) is planning to do about this particular act of union intimidation of a child, except that I’m too afraid that Van Hollen would tell us what he did when he heard about it…

Moe Lane

*Yup, already smeared by the Left. Incompetently, but that’s par for the course for Media Matters for America.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Some Wise Words on the Climate Debate

Via my friend and colleague Paul Chesser, this footage of Colorado State University climatologist Scott Denning speaking at the Heartland Institute’s Fourth Annual Conference on Climate Change is really quite refreshing. Denning is no “skeptic,” but he stresses that he’s a scientist who believes that public policy should be based on the facts we know about the world we live in — not on the skewed agenda of those who view their perspective on climate not as science, but as religion or politics.

Insightful remarks, and certainly ones I agree with. Video via Freedom Pub.

Stutzman jumps into the race for Souder’s seat

Disgraced Indiana Rep. Mark Souder resigned this week in the wake of the news of his affair with a female staffer. Souder just won a tough primary for his seat… which is now going to a special election, as there CLEARLY haven’t been enough of those this year. The date hasn’t been determined yet.

State Sen. Marlin Stutzman announced today that he was jumping into the race to replace Souder. Stutzman just lost to Dan Coats in the primary for Evan Bayh’s seat in the Senate, and will be shifting gears to get himself into the House. His anticipated competitors for the vacated seat are “state Representative Randy Borror, Fort Wayne City Council member Liz Brown, car dealer Bob Thomas and other Republicans.”

An interesting dynamic here. He obviously has some pretty heightened name recognition as a result of the Senate primary, and also has some cash left over from the last election - admittedly not a lot, but some. This provides him with a clear advantage, given the expected challengers. The district is a +14 Republican district, which overlaps with the district that Stutzman serves as a state Senator.

Glad to see Stutzman have another shot at getting to DC. This could be good.

The Limbaugh victory

In 2008 Zev Chafets profiled Rush Limbaugh in a good article for the New York Times Magazine. Chafets is a canny journalist who knew he had found a good subject. He proceeded to write a forthcoming book on Rush (Rush Limbaugh: An Army of One) that I look forward to reading.

Rush is the master of what he refers to as conservative strategery as well as what I would describe as tongue-in-cheek comedy. Not infrequently, Rush combines the two, as in his promotion of Operation Chaos during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign. We followed a few of the twists and turns of Rush's execution of Operation Chaos as he commanded his followers to vote for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries in order to forestall and complicate the rise of Barack Obama.

Rush deserves the attention that Chafets devotes to him, and he looms large in the nightmares of liberals who don't get the joke or the point. They take the line of brain-dead liberals like Al Franken, who holds in his inimitable style that Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat idiot. Brilliant. Franken really showed Rush when he got his chance on Air America, may it rest in peace.

Today Chafets takes to the New York Times editorial page to proclaim 'The Limbaugh victory.' In this column Chafets seeks to diagnose the root cause of the conservative resurgence that is taking place around the country.

In his lead paragraph, Chafets refers to 'very conservative Republicans' who 'seem to be doing so well lately.' He thereafter drops the 'very' and simply discusses the recent electoral success of Republicans against Democrats as well as the success of conservative candidates within the Republican Party.

Liberals would prefer to deny the conservative resurgence. Denial has been their first recourse. If you can't deny it, the next best thing is to attribute its cause to Rush. Enter Chafets. '[T]he most obvious explanation' for the conservative resurgence, according to Chafets, 'is the one that's been conspicuously absent from the gusher of analysis. Republican success in 2010 can be boiled down to two words: Rush Limbaugh.' Chafets describes Rush as 'the brains and the spirit behind [Republicans'] resurgence.'

This is an explanation that serves a couple of purposes. It gives New York Times readers a congenial explanation for a confusing (to them) phenomenon. At the same time, It gives them a familiar villain.

Liberals like to think that the program of national socialism on which Obama is embarked is a popular phenomenon. Instead, Obama's program has produced a grassroots rebellion harking back to the Founding Fathers. If you seek two words that best explain the resurgence of conservatives, Barack Obama is probably the correct answer.

Rush deserves great credit for maintaining and building conservative morale In the immediate aftermath of Obama's ascension. In today's column, however, I suspect that Chafets is executing his own variation of Operation Chaos, confusing the opposition and selling books at the same time. An Army of One comes out on May 25.

The Socialist Brain

1948 Video – When is the last time you have seen this?

What Ed Whittaker was really saying

FOXNews.com - Exclusive: Indiana Rep. Mark Souder to Resign Amid Allegations of Affair With Staffer

FOXNews.com - Exclusive: Indiana Rep. Mark Souder to Resign Amid Allegations of Affair With Staffer

Posted using ShareThis

Rush and the Governor of Arizona

Compare and contrast

The US way of handling pirates:

A federal judge has postponed the U.S. trial of six Somali nationals charged with piracy off the coast of Africa to give both sides more time to prepare.

U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson on Thursday pushed back the trial to Oct. 19 from July. The suspects are charged in an April 10 attack on the Navy vessel USS Ashland.

The Somalis, who don't speak English, are charged with piracy and related counts and could face life in prison if convicted.

The judge cited the potential for having to deal with classified information, the number of defendants, the language barrier and other hurdles in issuing the delay.

The Russian way of handling pirates:

Ten pirates captured by the Russian navy last week near Somalia were put in an inflatable boat without navigational equipment and cast adrift in the Indian Ocean last Friday. They are now presumed dead, according to Russian officials.

The official told the Russian press that after an hour, radar contact with the boat was lost and the pirates “apparently” had all died. He did not elaborate.

Hmmm ...

Documenting Evil: An Inconvenient History

Claire Berlinski has an intriguing piece in this issue of The City titled “A Hidden History of Evil: Why doesn’t anyone care about the unread Soviet archives?” Part research paper and part detective story, Berlinski traces the fate of the damning records of Soviet totalitarianism–an unappetising tale that does not turn rosy even with the advent of perestroika in the 1980s. A number of these documents have been physically and electronically smuggled out of Russia by researcher Pavel Stroilov and dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, who are now trying to publish them for a western audience. But they have found scant enthusiasm among translators and the academic presses that you might think would have an interest in disseminating primary documentation. Why?

Berlinski suggests that the root of the problem is a basic academic affinity with the tenets of communism and I’m inclined to think she’s right. In perhaps the same impulse that leads many denizens of the ivory tower to sympathize with Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, there is a tendency to view Soviet communism as a flawed but still valid experiment. For those who believe in the basic soundness of Marxism, the catastrophic failure of the Soviet Union is an inconvenient truth made more palatable by the assertion that it was brought about by external factors. The line seems to be that the Soviets were no better and worse than we–different, sure, but perhaps we could learn from them and we certainly are in no position to judge.

This never-never land of moral relativism is shattered by the kind of cold, hard documents Berlinski describes. A picture emerges of a creeping evil that threatened to engulf the west even as we were attempting a rapprochement with it. And yet the response is a collective yawn–perhaps a delicately raised eyebrow, a hint of impatience with this unseemly attempt to rake up bygones. Look away. There’s nothing to see here.

Unfortunately there is all too much to be seen–from the psychiatric “hospitals” to the hard-labor camps to the execution chambers–all of which added up to an utter disregard for human life and dignity that is at least on par with the depravities of Nazism. Berlinski writes:

We rightly insisted upon total denazification; we rightly excoriate those who now attempt to revive the Nazis’ ideology. But the world exhibits a perilous failure to acknowledge the monstrous history of Communism. These documents should be translated. They should be housed in a reputable library, properly cataloged, and carefully assessed by scholars. Above all, they should be well-known to a public that seems to have forgotten what the Soviet Union was really about. If they contain what Stroilov and Bukovsky say—and all the evidence I’ve seen suggests that they do—this is the obligation of anyone who gives a damn about history, foreign policy, and the scores of millions dead.

As uncomfortable as it may be for those who think it’s progressive to keep Mao’s Little Red Book on their bedside table or favor the radical chic of a Che t-shirt, we need to expose and acknowledge the reality of Soviet-style communism that has claimed so many tens of millions lives. A good place to start would be recognizing it for what it was, and understanding its history. To their credit, Yale University Press has published some related volumes of late, although they have not picked up the material in Berlinski’s article. Hopefully they will reconsider and publish the Stroilov and Bukovsky archives as well.

And Bravo Governor Christie

Bravo Governor Brewer

“Tea Party backs Coats” Huh?

The front page headline, “Tea partiers say they’ll back Coats in Senate bid” on May 6 caught me off guard. To start with, I consider myself a “tea partier” in that I am involved with the local group, the 6^th District Constitutional Patriots. We do not have any direct affiliation with Cindy Bachota of Concerned Citizens of Michiana, or any other group for that matter. Our general policy is that we do not endorse candidates; we provide information and forums so that candidates from any party and citizens can interact, allowing the citizens to make their own reasoned choices.

Ms. Bachota’s blanket statement pledging tea party support of Dan Coats as the Republican U.S. Senate candidate is not something our local group was consulted on. Had we been consulted, there would be no such support (regardless of the candidate or party). If individuals who happen to attend our meetings wish to support Mr. Coats or any candidate, that is their choice.

It is also, in my individual opinion, disconcerting that a tea party group would publicly pledge support for any candidate, let alone one who drew so much ire from the tea parties. A pledge of support, like a vote, should have more value and be earned, not automatic. A pledge of support, like a vote, should represent trust and confidence in the candidate, not blind allegiance to a party. Ms. Bachota’s pledge appears to be based on the resignation that “Oh well, he’s the guy with the ‘R’ after his name.”

I thought one of the reasons we all left the comfort of our homes to get involved in a grassroots political movement was to push back at the national political parties that have done this kind of thing over and over. I thought we were tired of Washington elites proselytizing to us. I thought we were pledging our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor for something different, not more of the same. Did something change?

My intent is not to dissuade anyone from voting for Mr. Coats. Your vote is your choice. My intent is, however, to encourage each to know the candidate before the vote is cast. Blind allegiance is one symptom of the disease of tyranny; the cure is an educated and independent electorate.

The Public Sector Weight Around Taxpayers’ Necks

Promoted from the diaries by Bill S.

“Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government.” So warned the union-friendly Franklin Roosevelt about the danger of public sector unionism. Some of us have ignored his counsel while others have simply chosen to look the other way. Regardless of your motivation all eyes should now be on public employee unions who continue to bleed American taxpayers dry.

Consider the following chart from Sunshine Review that outlines how much more state and local government employees as compared to the private sector:

Compensation	A. State and Local	B. Private Sector	Ratio A/B
Total Compensation	$39.66	$27.42	1.45
Wages and salaries	26.01	19.39	1.34
Benefits	13.65	8.02	1.70
Paid Leave	3.27	1.85	1.77
Supplemental Pay	.34	.83	.41
Health insurance	4.34	1.99	2.18
Defined benefit pension	2.85	.41	6.95
Defined contribution pension	.31	.53	.58
Other benefits	2.53	2.40	1.05

Going beyond hourly wages, the Washington Examiner, reporting on data from the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, finds that:

As of 2008, the average federal salary was $119,982, compared with $59,909 for the average private sector employee. In other words, the average federal bureaucrat makes twice as much as the average working taxpayer. Add the value of benefits like health care and pensions, and the gap grows even bigger. The average federal employee’s benefits add $40,785 to his annual total compensation, whereas the average working taxpayer’s benefits increase his total compensation by only $9,881. In other words, federal workers are paid on average salaries that are twice as generous as those in the private sector, and they receive benefits that are four times greater.

The startling pay difference in both hourly and yearly wages is instructive but is susceptible to rebuttal. Sure, if you take into account everyone it appears as if the public sector pays 44% than the private sector, but government jobs on the whole require more skill (or so the argument would go). Those private sector numbers average in all the minimum wage jobs that skew the private sector downward.

Point taken, so let’s take a deeper look into a job-by-job comparison of the public and private sectors. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (and compiled by the USA Today) here is a sampling of salaries for comparable occupations:

Job	Federal	Private	Difference
Budget Analyst	$73,140	$65,532	$7,608
Chemist	$98,060	$72,120	$25,940
Cook	$38,400	$23,279	$15,121
Economist	$101,020	$91,065	$9,955
Janitor	$30,110	$24,188	$5,922
Librarian	$76,110	$63,284	$12,826
Physician Assistant	$77,770	$87,783	-$10,013
PR Manager	$132,410	$88,241	$44,169
Registered Nurse	$74,460	$63,780	$10,680
Secretary	$44,500	$33,829	$10,671

The federal government does not create a traditional sellable product and thus produces no revenue outside of what it collects from taxpayers. As the size of the private sector wanes you would assume that the public sector, whose salaries are paid from private sector taxes, would be forced to contract. You’d be wrong. A new Gallup poll released May 3^rd “reveals significantly more hiring within the federal government than in the private sector.” This continues a theme seen throughout the recession – despite the private sector shedding jobs at a rate not seen since the Great Depression, the government continued to hire.

The continued growth isn’t a huge surprise. A full one-third of President Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package was aid to the public sector. As Michael Barone explains, the money worked:

“While the private sector has lost 7 million jobs, the number of public-sector jobs has risen. The number of federal government jobs has been increasing by 10,000 a month, and the percentage of federal employees earning over $100,000 has jumped to 19 percent during the recession.”

The growth however is creating an untenable situation. A smaller pool of private sector workers are being asked to subsidize an increasing number of public sector employees and their unnecessarily high wages. Something has to give. You’d think that cutting the size of the federal work force and instituting a moratorium on government wage increases would be one of the first and easiest recommendations of the President’s fiscal commission. Again, you’d be wrong.

The problem is that Democrats are in bed with public sector unions. Unions vote Democrat every November and funnel hundreds of millions of dollars towards their campaigns. In return, once elected, Democrats play political favorites and work to increase the union ranks with the understanding that more members means more votes and more money. It’s a self-perpetuating cycle that is becoming a weight around the necks of private sector workers

Eventually the private sector will simply be unable to foot the bill for public sector pay. Unfortunately, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the size of the federal government will be forced to get smaller. Without political pressure it is quite possible that Democrats in Washington will simply ask more of the private sector. Hello, VAT!

President Obama has repeatedly made clear that “everything is on the table” in trying to deal with our huge debt and deficit. The private sector must go further than to simply hope that he freezes the size and pay of government – they must translate that hope into votes.

by Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee

"

Spill, Baby, Spill!

Spill, Baby, Spill!: "

Don't look for the leak to be capped any time soon.

"

Not a Parody… Just Scary

ObamaBailout 2.0

The Senate has failed to invoke cloture on S.3217, Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, by a 56-42 vote today (60 votes needed to shut off debate). This is the third failed cloture vote in 3 days and sources close to the negotiations tell me that opponents of permanent bailout authority for the federal government are “hanging on by a thread.” My employer, The Heritage Foundation has put out an excellent video that educates as to the content of the legislation.